Sheriff believes relative was prosecuted unfairly

Brenda Battel and Bradley Massman Huron Daily Tribune

Updated
10:36 pm EDT, Friday, August 10, 2018

Huron County Sheriff Kelly J. Hanson addresses a question from the media on Friday during a press conference regarding a criminal case against a close relative of his. (Bradley Massman/Huron Daily Tribune)

Huron County Sheriff Kelly J. Hanson addresses a question from the media on Friday during a press conference regarding a criminal case against a close relative of his. (Bradley Massman/Huron Daily Tribune)

Image
1of/1

Caption

Close

Image 1 of 1

Huron County Sheriff Kelly J. Hanson addresses a question from the media on Friday during a press conference regarding a criminal case against a close relative of his. (Bradley Massman/Huron Daily Tribune)

Huron County Sheriff Kelly J. Hanson addresses a question from the media on Friday during a press conference regarding a criminal case against a close relative of his. (Bradley Massman/Huron Daily Tribune)

Sheriff believes relative was prosecuted unfairly

1 / 1

Back to Gallery

BAD AXE — Huron County Sheriff Kelly J. Hanson held a press conference Friday at the Huron County Expo Center regarding a criminal case against a close relative of his.

On Wednesday, the Huron County Prosecutor's Office dropped a felony charge of possession with intent to deliver against the teen. The teen's probation is scheduled to conclude — if he doesn't violate any conditions — at the end of the month.

In his opening statement at the press conference, Hanson said Prosecutor Timothy J. Rutkowski "unfairly overcharged" the teen.

Hanson also noted he rented the Expo Center for the press conference, and said he was not abusing his position as sheriff by using the facility.

Hanson presented media outlets with an alternative transcript to the one the prosecution had of the dash cam video recording of the incident where Hanson’s relative was confronted by a state trooper.

On June 17, 2017, Hanson's relative was riding in a car with two other teens and they were pulled over for a seat belt violation.

According to the dash cam video, Michigan State Police Trooper Daniel Thompson questioned the occupants about the odor of marijuana coming from the vehicle.

When the trooper asked Hanson’s relative what he was doing with the marijuana, the transcript the prosecutor's office commissioned indicates the teen saying he was, "Sellin' it."

However, a transcript commissioned by Hanson raised a debate about what exactly was said.

Another news outlet depicted the teen as stating, “selling it,” as did the transcript from the prosecution.

Hanson, on the other hand, said what his relative said was inaudible, and played the recording Friday to demonstrate that.

The news outlet's report, and prosecutor's transcript, also contained audio of Thompson telling Hanson on the phone from the scene that the teen was “trying to sell marijuana out of the car.”

Hanson, however, countered with a transcript he had ordered, which stated the trooper was “smelling marijuana from the car.”

The transcript from the prosecution was completed by a licensed party who had recently retired from the Huron County court system, Hanson said.

The transcript Hanson provided was done by a legal services company in Grand Rapids.

This video has the excerpts from the police officer's dash cam video that pertain to the discrepancies between the defense and prosecution. The defense claims the sheriff's relative said he was "smelling" marijuana (not "selling" it), and that the officer said "there's a strong smell of marijuana in the car," not that the teen was "trying to sell marijuana out of the car."

Police initially recommended the teen be charged with possession of marijauna, but after Rutkowski reviewed the dash cam video, the charge was modified to possession with intent to deliver marijuana.

According to a supplemental police report from the state police post, dated Oct. 16, 2017, Thompson wrote, “The property was packaged in seven individual baggies … Through my training and experience, the property seized was packaged to sell.”

In February, the teen pleaded no contest to that charge. Upon successful completion of probation, the charge would be adjudicated to possession of marijuana — a misdemeanor.

Hanson said his relative would be off probation, if he obeys the law, at the end of this month. Before the felony charge was dropped, if the teen violated any conditions before the end of his probation, he would be convicted of possession of marijuana with intent to deliver.

With the felony charge dismissal, the teen will now face a probation violation if he violates his probation before the end of August. Regardless, a charge of misdemeanor possession of marijuana will go on his record.

Hanson objected that the case was never allowed on the “consent calendar” in Huron County Probate Court — which is the way similar juvenile cases are handled.

“Consent calendar, as I understand it … it’s a way for a judge to take matters into the court’s hand without … any juveniles getting convicted,” Hanson said. “He or she (the judge) can impose punishment … without having to worry about any court laws that … make things mandatory punishment …”

“Total discretion is given to the judge,” he added. “And there’s no record of the conviction.”

The case ended up being moved to Sanilac County.

In February, a hearing was called to determine Rutkowski’s removal from the case, per a motion filed by Hanson’s relative’s attorney.

The morning of the hearing, a plea agreement was reached. At that time, Hanson did not see or hear any of the footage.

“This is something we should have had right off the bat,” Hanson said at Friday's press conference.

He noted he didn't know whether that was the fault of the prosecution or the fault of the juvenile’s attorney. Hanson's relative has had three separate attorneys on the case.

The defense filed a motion Wednesday to set aside the plea, and the felony charge was then dismissed.

Rutkowski did not attend Friday’s press conference, but did confirm he received an invite on Thursday through email.

“The only thing that happened was speeding time up by 28 days,” Rutkowski told the Tribune of Wednesday’s court ruling. “Up to this point, he (the juvenile) hasn’t done anything where he isn’t complying with any rules of his probation.”

“It was a done issue on Feb. 15,” he added. “It was just a matter of, ‘How will he do on probation?’”

"... Once again, I have no feud with the sheriff," Rutkowski later said. "I work well with the sheriff's office personnel. And, like I've said before, if the sheriff wants to come to my office and discuss any differences between us, the invite is open."